Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHistoric Preservation Commission - Minutes - 09/21/2022Historic Preservation Commission Page 1 September 21, 2022 Kurt Knierim, Chair City Council Chambers Jim Rose, Vice Chair City Hall West Margo Carlock 300 Laporte Avenue Meg Dunn Fort Collins, Colorado And Remotely Via Zoom Walter Dunn Jenna Edwards Bonnie Gibson Eric Guenther Anne Nelsen Regular Meeting September 21, 2022 Minutes • CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair Rose called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. • ROLL CALL PRESENT: Margo Carlock, Meg Dunn, Walter Dunn, Jenna Edwards, Jim Rose ABSENT: Bonnie Gibson, Eric Guenther, Kurt Knierim, Anne Nelsen STAFF: Maren Bzdek, Jim Bertolini, Claire Havelda, Yani Jones, Melissa Matsunaka • AGENDA REVIEW No changes to posted agenda. • CONSENT AGENDA REVIEW No items were pulled from consent. • STAFF REPORTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA No reports on items not on the agenda. • PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None. Historic Preservation Commission Historic Preservation Commission Page 2 September 21, 2022 • CONSENT AGENDA [Timestamp: 5:34 p.m.] 1. CONSIDERATION AND APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF AUGUST 17, 2022 The purpose of this item is to approve the minutes from the August 17, 2022 regular meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission. Member M Dunn moved that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the Consent Agenda of the August 17, 2022 regular meeting as presented. Member W Dunn seconded. [Timestamp: 5:35 p.m.] • DISCUSSION AGENDA 2. REPORT ON STAFF ACTIVITIES SINCE THE LAST MEETING DESCRIPTION: Staff is tasked with an array of different responsibilities including code- required project review decisions on historic properties, support to other standing and special work groups across the City organization, and education & outreach programming. This report will provide highlights for the benefit of Commission members and the public, and for transparency regarding decisions made without the input of the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC). STAFF: Jim Bertolini, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Staff Report Mr. Bertolini reported on the activities on the past couple of weeks. He provided Education and Outreach highlights, such as the Women’s Suffrage Walking Tour and a Black and Hispanic Heritage Walking Tour for City Planning Staff. Mr. Bertolini discussed a survey result on 301 E. Olive Street that was determined eligible under Standard 3, Design/Construction, and significant under Standard 2, Persons/Groups. Public Input None. Commission Questions and Discussion Member M. Dunn asked for clarification on the length of the walking tours. Mr. Bertolini replied that the length of the tour varies but the tours the past month averaged one mile and took about ninety minutes. [Timestamp: 5:40 p.m.] 3. 1113 MATHEWS – SINGLE-FAMILY DEMOLITION/NEW CONSTRUCITON – DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: The owner is seeking to demolish the existing buildings on the property that contribute to the Laurel School Historic District and construct a new single-family dwelling. APPLICANT: Marc Leblond and Rachel Bedard Historic Preservation Commission Page 3 September 21, 2022 Staff Report Yani Jones presented the staff report noting that this is a nationally registered design review. She noted the Historic Preservation Commission shall review the proposed alterations and issue a report on the effects of demolition to the Laurel School District and whether new construction meets Standard 9. Ms. Jones mentioned certain aspects of the proposal and noted staff’s recommendations are included in the staff report. She provided background on the property and discussed photos of the property. She provided information on the new construction site plan, including siding, roof, and windows. She discussed the staff finding that the property does not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation due to the demolition of the historic residence. She noted that the new construction generally meets Standard 9 in relation to the Laurel School Historic District. She stated that the primary question from the staff for the Commission is determine if there are any changes to staff’s findings documented in the Draft SHPO Report. Applicant Presentation Rachel Bedard and Mark Leblond, property owners, agreed to hold the hearing in the hybrid/remote format. Ms. Bedard discussed their history with the property. Commission Questions and Discussion Member Carlock asked if the applicants considered keeping the façade of the property to keep the historical character of the property and street view. Ms. Bedard replied that they had considered all their options. She noted that the current front door is less than twenty-nine inches wide. She indicated that they want to make it an accessible home. Mr. Leblond discussed retrofitting the property to ensure energy efficiency would be very challenging and difficult to achieve with a remodel. Public Input None Commission Deliberation Member M Dunn moved that the Historic Preservation Commission find that the proposed plans and specifications for the alteration to the Harley Kimble Residence at 1113 Mathew Street as presented do not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, including the new construction, in relation to the Laurel School Historic District, and that our findings shall be provided to the owner and potentially transmitted to the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer to update the property’s historic status, which will be that is not historic and it negatively affects the historic district. Member Carlock seconded the motion. 5-0 the motion passed. Member M Dunn noted that the property is a contributing house and already found to be historic and may be individually eligible. She discussed that the new construction is not in keeping with the neighborhood by taking a one and one-half story house and having it appear like a two and one-half story house to the roof pitch. She noted that the solid to void ratio is different that the houses around it and the second story balcony patio to be out of keeping with the district. Member Carlock agreed with Member Dunn. Vice Chair Rose discussed the role of the HPC for a contributing property in a national historic district. [Timestamp: 5:55 p.m.] Historic Preservation Commission Page 4 September 21, 2022 4. 723 W OLIVE – FINAL DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This item is to provide a final design review of a proposed rear addition and detached garage/studio for the City Landmark at 723 W. Olive St., the Parsons/Morgan House & Attached Garage. The owner is seeking a Certificate of Appropriateness for their final designs. APPLICANT: Chris Orton Staff Report Yani Jones presented the staff report noting the applicant is seeking the Commission’s input regarding the final design’s compliance with the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation. She detailed the architecture and history of the building and showed several photos of the building and surrounding properties. Ms. Jones mentioned certain aspects of the proposal and noted staff’s recommendations are included in the staff report and they have particularly highlighted the rear addition, including the expansion of the existing mudroom and addition of a new master bedroom and bathroom for an additional four hundred twenty-seven (427) square feet. She discussed that Phase 2 of the project would include a new detached 1.5 story, two-car garage with studio above. It would be an ally-loaded garage at the south end of the lot. She discussed that the driveway length has been adjusted based on feedback from the Commission during the conceptual review. She mentioned the siding and windows. She discussed a Commissioner inquiry regarding whether the applicant explored additional roof form options. She discussed information related to specific items on which staff is recommending the Commission focus its discussion. She stated that the primary questions from the staff for the Commission is to either issue, issue with conditions, or deny a Certificate of Appropriateness under Municipal Code 14, Article IV. Applicant Presentation John Litschert, architect, and representative of the property owner, agreed to hold the hearing in the hybrid/remote format. Commission Questions and Discussion Member M Dunn expressed her appreciation to Mr. Litschert for the explanation on the proposed roof and for moving the new garage closer to the alley. She noted that the addition was thoughtful and retains the integrity of the historic bungalow and historic garage, as well as valuing the character of the house and character of the neighborhood. Vice Chair Rose agreed with Member M Dunn. He commended Mr. Litschert for the sensitivity he displayed and for his efforts. Public Input None Commission Deliberation Member M Dunn moved that the Historic Preservation Commission approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed work on the Parson/Morgan Watrous House and Attached Garage at 723 W. Olive Street, because the work complies with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation and Chapter 14, Article IV of the Municipal Code. Member W Dunn seconded the motion. 5-0 the motion passed. [Timestamp: 6:11 p.m.] Historic Preservation Commission Page 5 September 21, 2022 5. 113 N SHERWOOD – FINAL DESIGN REVIEW DESCRIPTION: This is a request for a Certificate of Appropriateness for changing a roof on a designated property from wood shingle to a synthetic roofing product that simulates the appearance of wood shingles. Associated fascia and gutter work is expected. The alterations are proposed for the Boughton (Bouton) House, 113 North Sherwood Street. APPLICANT: Devin Odell and Maria Fernandez-Gimenez, Owners. Staff Report Mr. Bertolini presented the staff report and discussed the history of the property and its designation as a National Landmark. He stated the role of the Commission is to make a decision regarding whether the proposed work meets the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation. He discussed the historic significance of the property, specifically noting the distinct shingle style of architecture, and provided photos of the existing conditions. He outlined the proposed project to replace the wood shingle roof with an F-wave polymer product that is designed to replicate the wood shingles. Mr. Bertolini stated staff has referred this issue to the Commission due to the prominence of the property. He noted the proposed replacement of wood shingle roof with Brava synthetic product to replicate wood shingles. Mr. Bertolini outlined the applicable standards and discussed the reasons staff believes they are not met given the roof is a character-defining feature of the home. He discussed examples of approved substitute roofing materials used on historic buildings. Mr. Bertolini stated the staff recommendation of a qualified approval, including a waiver of conditions, with a condition related to color, under Section 14-5, if the Commission believes that is warranted. He noted that staff would qualify this recommendation to acknowledge that, with some experimentation with substitute roofing is necessary int eh immediate future, this particular property is difficult because of how significant the roof shingling is to conveying the architectural style and significance of the property. Commission Questions and Discussion Devin Odell, property owner, agreed to hold the hearing in a hybrid/remote format. Judge Odell discussed photos he took of Brava roofing samples on residences in northern Colorado. He noted the difference in texture achieved on the Brava samples compared to the F-Wave roofing type. Chris Day, representative of Brava, discussed the texture of the roofing pieces and the manufacturing process that involves a compression molding technique based on cedar shake. He noted the process of achieving accurate coloring and fire suppression. He discussed the lifetime of the product is fifty years. Vice Chair Rose asked questions about the sample presented by Mr. Day. Mr. Day noted that the Brava roofs have been successfully installed around the country. He noted the product weight is similar to the wood shingle but does not absorb water. Vice Chair Rose and Member M Dunn inspected the sample material. Member M Dunn asked about Mr. Day’s experience in installing the roofing material on historic buildings since many historic homes are used to the freeze/thaw cycle and water absorption/drying patterns. Mr. Day discussed his experience in other states. He noted there is not any expansion or contraction with this product. Member M Dunn is concerned with the framing of the house not holding up the same weight. Mr. Day noted that structural engineers are not involved with the installation of this product because they are not adding additional weight to the house. Judge Odell and Mr. Bertolini discussed that the design assistance provided by the city found that the structural engineer noted that are no structural concerns with lightening the load. Vice Chair noted that there is information in the packet that the weight is equivalent and not a real issue. Historic Preservation Commission Page 6 September 21, 2022 Member M Dunn mentioned that the color of the sample is different than previous products and closer to a wood shingle. She noted that end to end, the shingles are different heights, similar to wood shingles and shake. Vice Chair Rose noted that cedar shingles change color every year. He discussed the difficulty in choosing an accurate color approximation for the Brava product. Mr. Day noted that there is UV protection added to the product to prevent fading. Member M Dunn discussed the staff recommendation of choosing a more faded color option. She noted that in her experience, this product really impressed her. She loved the texture, the thickness, and the mottling of the color. She noted that this is a good replacement option for wood shingles. Vice Chair Rose and Mr. Day discussed the rating required for fire, hail, and the outcomes. Vice Chair agreed with Member M Dunn about achieving a product that has practical applications. He noted that the property was at the beginning of the period called the Shingle Style and discussed the historical integrity. He indicated that the proposed product will approximate the look of the historical roof very well. Public Input None Commission Deliberation Member Carlock moved that the Historic Preservation Commission approve a waiver of conditions under Municipal Code 14-5, permitting the proposal to replace the wood shingle roof with Brava synthetic shingles at the Boughton House at 113 North Sherwood Street as presented, finding that, although the proposed work does not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, the project does meet the criteria for a Waiver of Conditions, specifically that the requested waiver as submitted will not diverge from the conditions and requirements of this Chapter except in nominal or inconsequential ways and will continue to advance the purposes of the Chapter. Member W Dunn seconded the motion. 5-0 the motion passed. **Stipulated Agreement** - Staff shall be directed to work with the Applicants, Supplier, and Installer, to find a color that is acceptable. Staff and Applicants agreed. Member M Dunn clarified that the requirement to use the same materials has been waived in this instance only, and this approval is not an indication how the Commission will decide for future properties. [Timestamp: 6:59 p.m.] 6. LUC UPDATE – FORMAL RECOMMENDATION DESCRIPTION: As a follow up to the discussion at the August 2022 Historic Preservation Commission meeting regarding the proposed Land Use Code Phase One Update, City staff will provide an updated overview of the key proposal details and a request for a recommendation to City Council, based on the anticipated impact of the changes on the recognition and protection of historic resources. The draft code sections are currently posted for public review at https://www.fcgov.com/housing/lucupdates. STAFF: Maren Bzdek, Historic Preservation Manager Noah Beals, Development Review Manager Meaghan Overton, Housing Manager Staff Report Ms. Bzdek introduced the presentation by Mr. Beals and Ms. Overton. They provided an updated overview of the key proposal details regarding the proposed Land Use Code Phase One Update. Historic Preservation Commission Page 7 September 21, 2022 Commission Questions and Discussion Member M Dunn asked for clarification on why the code is encouraging mixed-use versus requiring mixed-use. Ms. Overton noted that HA-9 it is a policy from Our Climate Future Plan and references affordable housing. Mr. Beals discussed that commercial zone districts and incentivizing mixed-use will be a focus of Phase Two. Member M Dunn discussed new construction, big box stores, and her preference for mixed-use buildings. She asked if there are any disincentives to reducing density. Mr. Beals noted that there is a max floor area by building type. Member M Dunn asked about an attached house with a lot increase. She discussed that the floor area ratio gets to increase based upon increased lot size. Ms. Overton discussed the cap on the floor area of a detached house in the Old Town District. Mr. Beals noted that the current code incentivizes larger houses. He indicated that the proposed code would eliminate the formula used to calculate floor permitted floor area. Member M Dunn asked how the proposed code is encouraging the reuse of buildings. Mr. Beals noted that there will be more allowances for use of buildings with the building-type standards, as well as keeping the Historic Preservation standards. Ms. Overton discussed benefits of conversions. Member M Dunn and Mr. Beals discussed the square footage of a duplex verses a single-family house. They discussed row houses in NCL to OTA zone. Member M Dunn and Ms. Overton discussed the height changes in the proposed code. Member M Dunn asked for a hyperlink to reduce confusion. Member M Dunn and Mr. Beals discussed the driveway requirements for an Accessory Dwelling Unit. Member M Dunn commented about residential/commercial buffer zones and mixed-use. Mr. Beals discussed the new ADU process. Ms. Overton noted that the ADU would need to comply with the building code and fire code. Member M Dunn and Mr. Beals discussed corner stores and neighborhood centers. Ms. Overton noted that Council is discussing fifteen-minute communities. Vice Chair Rose commented on density and making the community walkable versus growing outside of our boundaries. He discussed density differences between old town and midtown. He commented on the challenges of utilizing and incentivizing current resources. He foresees historic districts from the 1950’s and 1960’s that will create different challenges. Ms. Overton discussed the recommendation process and the proposal procedure regarding Council. Public Input None Commission Deliberation Member Carlock moved that the Historic Preservation Commission recommend approval based on the following findings: the proposed changes will allow for an increase in overall housing capacity and housing affordability with continuing to allow for preservation of historic resources. Member W Dunn seconded the motion. 5-0 the motion passed. Member M Dunn and Ms. Overton discussed the staff’s presentation slides. [Timestamp: 8:16 p.m.] • OTHER BUSINESS Ms. Bzdek acknowledged a new Commission Member, Jenna Edwards. Ms. Edwards introduced herself to the Commission.